Another thing to tease out of this brutal killing by Calvin Finley is that his methodology for killing the guard would also work for any other visibly armed person, such as a LACOCer out in public.
An unhesitating, surprising, direct and vicious attack atface to face rangelike Finley used will take out an OCer. (Or a CCer for that matter.)
As I pointed out before, criminals are by and large, cowards. Short of the attacker being a psychopath, there would be no significant gain for the increased risk in attacking a LAC OCer (or CCer) unless they were in the way of, or carrying something specific that the criminal wanted.
Calvin Finley is not a coward, then? Or is he a psychopath?
I agree that Finley would not have any significant gain by shooting a surprised LAC OCer (or CCer) at the time of the robberty. But I wasn't suggesting that in any way. I was suggesting that, ingeneral,Finley's methodology would be very effective against any OCer (or CCer)--independent of the armored car robbery setting.
The mass majority of these types of robberies in America are smash and grab (in and out as quick as possible) or they overwhelm by numbers and force. Criminals themselves have stated almost unanimously that they fear a citizen carrying a gun far more than they fear the police.
Corrilation? I believe so.
I don't think this is plausible. Though I'm willing to be persuaded by data or citation. Citizens are attacked physically A LOT more frequently than cops are in this country.
In the event that an OCer was on scene and the unlikly event that a criminal even noticed he had a gun (as opposed to the criminal identifing it as a cell phone, multi tool, PDA, ect., at a glance) unless the OCer was infact the target itself, he most likely would not be put in the position of being attacked in such a manner.
As said above, I wasn't thinking about the OCer at the scene of a robbery,e.g., an armored car guard robbery. I was trying to tease out what the Finley methodology could mean in other situations. Frankly, I was thinking of the perennial question of just exactly how vulnerableis an OCer to a potential threat from somewhere, out there, in the public space environment?
After thinking about it some more, I've come to the conclusion that the truth is probably that the Findley method should be of more concern to OCers (eventually) than to, say, cops. Or CCers. But probably not armed armored car guards...
"An unhesitating, suprising, direct and vicious attack at face to face range like Finley used..."
would likely take out RoboCop.
The point here is not to examine the effectivness of the attack, but given all circumstances and motives, who the target of such an attack would be. The bystandard that the criminal is not even really focused on? OR the COP/GUARD/EMPLOYEE standing in the way of the prize.
No. That's not true. I'm kind of uninterested in the armored car guard attack example. It's pretty simple and assimilable.
But the Finley method, now proven to happen,is replicable to other criminal attacks. Including against an OCer who is not prepared for it....
Of course, other questions come up in the line of thought I'm suggesting. Such as, "Why would a perp Finley an OCer?" Or"A perp would be more likely to Finley a CCer, woudn't he?" Etcetera, etcetera. That's much moreinteresting.